My path report and questions
- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Hey everyone, So I’m finding my path report is confusing me a bit…Catherine you may understand what I’m trying to say as it might come across a tad confusing…you seem to be the most knowledgeable.
1. Ok so My melanoma came from an existing nevus…my path report states it’s “0.75mm and part of the lesion is an existing nevus”, could this mean that the melanoma is thinner and the whole nevus is 0.75mm?
2. When the path is talking about my margins it states “complete of a margin by 1mm from in situ component, 3.6mm from invasive component and 4.6mm from deep margin. Can a melanoma have both an invasive and in situ component??? I thought if it has an invasive part then it’s no longer in situ.
3. Path says no mitosis seen…I thought all melanomas have some level of mitosis?
4. Path says “growth phase – horizontal” I thought it would be vertical if it had gone down layers?
I hope this makes sense! Any input would be awesome and welcomed.
Thanks again
Did a dermatopathologist perform the pathology? I agree this is a little confusing. So this melanoma had some invasive component but also insitu. Did it say it was in vertical growth phase? I’ve never heard of horizontal growth phase. Radial growth phase is basically the same as insitu. If there is no mitosis that is excellent. Let me know the author of the report and maybe another opinion would help. In general, you can be reassured that this was a low risk lesion caught early~! It was done by dr Susan Carr, she is a dermatopathologist for the Sydney skin hospital a division of the Cancer Foundation Australia. No doesn’t say anything about vertical growth phase, says horizontal growth phase.
How would I get a second opinion? Does that mean someone else looks at the biopsy?
That is why it seems different, you are from Australia! So they use horizontal instead of radial. Makes sense, meaning it is spreading across the skin rather than down into the skin. I think you should be ok with her opinion since she is a dermatopathologist. I’m uncertain how they handle second opinions with your health care system. Haha probably should have mentioned that!! But if there is an invasive component or even a Clark level wouldn’t that mean it’s now vertical?? Clark Levels are no longer considered an important part of the pathology report (although Dr. Clark was my doc and brilliant) it is all based on breslow depth and mitosis. Yours sounds very low risk. Ok thanks. Another question…why are you more at risk for melanoma agin? Is it because you obviously have the skin for it and the sun exposure or is it a habit of the cancer to just pop up again? Also I have heard the next time it comes back it will be more aggressive…is this true or is this because people have left it and only detected at a later stage? I’m still confused about a few things haha I think I may need an appointment with my derm to get all of this off my chest but write down the answers because I’m sure I have asked all of this!
You have been so great since I’ve joined this group, thanks so much Catherine
You are unlikely to get it again, those with MANY moles are at higher risk. But if you should get another, it is not going to be more aggressive. You will most likely find it early and curable! Keep up the skin exams and avoid that dangerous Australian sun at peak hours. Catherine Poole wrote:You are unlikely to get it again, those with MANY moles are at higher risk. But if you should get another, it is not going to be more aggressive. You will most likely find it early and curable! Keep up the skin exams and avoid that dangerous Australian sun at peak hours.
Catherine:
What is considered “MANY” moles? More than 50? 100? Also, I have age/liver spots and larger freckles. Would these be counted as “Moles”, I know they’re technically not moles, but they are spots on the skin.
- The forum ‘Melanoma Diagnosis: Stages I &II’ is closed to new topics and replies.